2. speakers
  3. 1050321889

B&W vs Martin Logan

I currently have Martin Logan Odessey/Theater/Aerius in my system with Krell amplification and processing. I'm considering a change. I've heard many good things about B&W. Could someone with experience with both tell me the pros and cons of each. If I go with the B&W it will be the nautilus 802's or the 800's for my main speakers, and 805's for the rear of our theater. My listening is about 60% theater and 40% 2 channel. Thanks for the advice.
simancd
sugarbrie
3,854 posts
 
Boy.....You are really talking about two completely different animals here. They are both nice speaker lines, so why do you want to switch?

The most obvious difference is the appearance. Other than that I would think the Martin Logan's are somewhat more transparent for 2 channel audio; and the B&W's have more power and dynamics for those movie soundtracks.

Since we are talking home theater, George Lucas uses Nautilus 802's in his studio, if that helps you decide. Lucas uses the Nautilus 802 for all surround channels (5).



.
kemp
20 posts
 
I wouldn't use George Lucas as a guide for speaker buying, we all know he can't write/direct, so why would you think he can hear?

-Kevin
bowbow
123 posts
 
Kevin...Unless you can write and direct better than Lucas, what does it say about your hearing??
jayctoy's avatar
jayctoy
3,859 posts
 
This are both good speakers, totally different,My own
preference are The logans for both music and HT,Dont
get me wrong the 802's are really excellent,If you
like more dynamic the way to go.My friend likes the
N802 than my quest before they were rewired with
siltech, after the modification. He likes my logan
better.Either way you will have a good speaker.
More to discover